Distribution, Optimum Detection Time and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Rates of the Microorganisms Isolated from Blood Cultures over a 4-Year Time Period in a Turkish University Hospital and a Review of the International Literature

Kurtoğlu, MG; Bozkurt, Hayrunnisa Bekis; Tuncer, Oğuz; Keşli, Recep; Berktaş, Mustafa

doi:10.1177/147323000803600613

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is clear that the condition served in Anaerobic media poorly support the growth of inoculated fungi, and that, in rare cases, despite the negative signal of the BACTEC system, a limited fungal cell load may be present. In the case of clinical blood samples, the false-negative results are regarded rather seldom, but were reported in some media of the BACTEC as well as BacT/ALERT systems [ 13 , 14 ]. Interestingly, in the polymicrobial model of infection, detection of yeasts by Anaerobic media was enhanced up to 79 % [ 6 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of blood culture media for the detection of fungi

Nawrot

Kowalska−Krochmal

Sulik-Tyszka

et al. 2014

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the utility of BACTEC™ Mycosis-IC/F (Mycosis), BACTEC™ Plus Aerobic/F (Aerobic), and BACTEC™ Plus Anaerobic/F (Anaerobic) media in the detection of fungi from simulated (obtained by the inoculation of tested media first with sterile sheep’s blood and subsequently with one of 60 clinical yeast isolates) and clinical blood samples, taken during routine diagnostic examination in two hospitals. All tested strains grew on Mycosis as well as Aerobic bottles, and the time to detection obtained for Mycosis was significantly shorter (p < 0.05). The largest differences in the time to positivity was found for Candida glabrata and Cryptococcus neoformans, when Mycosis preceded Aerobic in 20–48 h (mean 35.5 h) and 0.7–64 h (mean 24 h), respectively. On the contrary, C. krusei were detected earlier in Aerobic media. In clinical samples, the detection of C. glabrata was also significantly faster in Mycosis than in Aerobic (29.22 ± 11.48 h compared to 86 ± 40 h). The media complement each other and, in 45 % of clinical examination sets, a single positive medium was noted (25 % in Mycosis and 19 % in Aerobic). The study proved that both Aerobic and Mycosis media serve as the correct condition for the culture of fungi and that they varied significantly in the detection time of clinically important species. This result could suggest that the simultaneous use of Aerobic as well as Mycosis media may improve the time of diagnosis in many patients, especially those infected with C. glabrata or C. neoformans.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of blood culture media for the detection of fungi

Nawrot

Kowalska−Krochmal

Sulik-Tyszka

et al. 2014

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Working in a rural area of Turkey where brucellosis is hyperendemic, Kurtoglu et al cultured blood samples from febrile patients and processed them with the small Bactec 9050 and the medium-size Bactec 9120 versions of the system. Vials were routinely monitored for up to 5 days, but when brucellosis was suspected, the incubation period was extended to 2 weeks (82). A total of 60 Brucella-positive vials were identified within a 10-day incubation period, but no precise data on the detection time were reported.…”

Section: Table 1 Factors That Determine the Positivity Rate Of Blood mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additional retrospective studies performed in countries in the developing world have also reported the recovery of Brucella species within a few days by using the Bactec 9000 series of automated instruments (35)(36)(37)(38). All these studies, however, employed short incubation protocols: 5 days (35), 1 week (37, 41, 75), or 5 days that would be extended to 14 days when brucellosis was suspected (38,82). Terminal blind subcultures of seemingly sterile vials were not performed in any of these cases.…”

Section: Table 1 Factors That Determine the Positivity Rate Of Blood mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY The clinical presentation of brucellosis in humans is variable and unspecific, and thus, laboratory corroboration of the diagnosis is essential for the patient’s proper treatment. The diagnosis of brucellar infections can be made by culture, serological tests, and nucleic acid amplification assays. Modern automated blood culture systems enable detection of acute cases of brucellosis within the routine 5- to 7-day incubation protocol employed in clinical microbiology laboratories, although a longer incubation and performance of blind subcultures may be needed for protracted cases. Serological tests, though they lack specificity and provide results that may be difficult to interpret in individuals repeatedly exposed to Brucella organisms, nevertheless remain a diagnostic cornerstone in resource-poor countries. Nucleic acid amplification assays combine exquisite sensitivity, specificity, and safety and enable rapid diagnosis of the disease. However, long-term persistence of positive molecular test results in patients that have apparently fully recovered is common and has unclear clinical significance and therapeutic implications. Therefore, as long as there are no sufficiently validated commercial tests or studies that demonstrate an adequate interlaboratory reproducibility of the different homemade PCR assays, cultures and serological methods will remain the primary tools for the diagnosis and posttherapeutic follow-up of human brucellosis.

show abstract

“…When the results of these studies are evaluated, it is seen that the system with the highest false positivity rate is Versa TREK [7,10]. Despite the various reports, it can be said that the false positivity rate in the Bactec System is generally higher than Bac/Alert (Bactec: 0.2-2.2% average 1.18 vs Bact/Alert: 0-1.6% on average 0.88) [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Except for the study conducted by Smith et al, we found that Bactec's false positivity rate was slightly higher than Bact/Alert in blood culture systems based on CO 2 measurements.…”

Section: Data Analysis and Ethical Permissionmentioning

confidence: 99%